posted
Has NASA ruled out orbital debris as a cause of the wing's damage? I was shocked to learn (from a documentary on PBS) that during EVA the shuttle has to change it's pitch to shield astronauts from possible N.E.O. impacts. It shields them with the bottom of the ship: the side with the heat shield. I'm not saying that happened here (no EVA was performed) but is is a scary thought with all the floating crap zooming along at the same speeds as the shuttle....it could become a even more serious danger in future space missions. Imagine the outcry if some astronaut was killed by a scrap of foil flying at 14000 mph. Scary.
[ February 07, 2003, 11:49 PM: Message edited by: Jason Abbadon ]
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
hm, they can't figure the damage from that 34 pixel wide image? for shame...
BTW space debris is getting thicker every day.. and most of it does travel at speed faster than.. well, a speeding bullet.
some scientists have estimated that if the growth of spaceborne junk (shaken off of craft, satellites and other man made article loss or breakup) continues at its current rate, orbital space might become impassable for EVA work..
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
The media is fixated on the foam theory. I don't buy this theory. The foam was destroyed by the orbiter, not the other way around.
I am in favor of the shuttle impacted by space debris or a mechanical failure in the space frame. I think the former is more likely.
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I was looking through the printed material on the space shuttle program. Each mission costs approximately 1.5 billion dollars. There are five missions a year at most. 1.5 times 5 is 7.5, or 7.5 billion dollars a year. NASA received for the past budget approximately 15 billion dollars. Translation-50% of the budget is devoted to the launching of these shuttles.
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Not entirely true newark...payload fees are charged to the individual industry or academia groups that sponsor the onboard experiements. If station components are the intended payload then it is more like what you are saying...which was the case for the last few flights. And the flightrate had dropped from 5 to 4 for the forseeable future, even before the Columbia incident.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Da_bang80
A few sectors short of an Empire
Member # 528
posted
quote:Originally posted by Ultra Magnus: So is your barrier of idiocy.
ZING!
That Picture on the CNN website looks like an ink splotch to me.
-------------------- Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change. The courage to change the things I cannot accept. And the wisdom to hide the bodies of all the people I had to kill today because they pissed me off.
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
